New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Friday dismissed a plea by Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee challenging the Allahabad High Court chief justice’s administrative decision to withdraw the Gyanvapi case from a single-judge bench hearing since 2021.
A three-judge bench led by Chief Justice of India DY Chandrachud declined to interfere with Chief Justice Diwaker’s order. The apex court observed that certain things should remain within the realm of Chief Justice of the High Court. The single-judge bench of the High Court was hearing the plea challenging the maintainability of a suit seeking restoration of a temple at the site where the Gyanvapi mosque exists in Varanasi.
Senior advocate Huzefa Ahmadi, represented the mosque committee, before the bench, also comprising justices J B Pardiwala and Manoj Misra. During the hearing, the bench said, “We should not interfere with the order of the chief justice of the high court. In high courts, it is a very standard practice….”. Ahmadi said it was unfair to the judge hearing the case. The CJI said the chief justice of the high court had indicated the reasons, while declining to interfere with the high court’s decision and before dismissing the plea, the CJI perused the reasons for the transfer of the case. The CJI said he did not want to read it in open court.
“Paras 11 and 12, sort of put a disquiet in our minds. What the chief has said in paras 11 and 12, those two sentences are enough for us to affirm the order”, said the CJI. Ahmadi said the matter is being heard and you see the way the wind is blowing. The Chief Justice said, “Sorry, let it go before another judge”.
The Anjuman Intezamia Masjid Committee moved the apex court challenging the withdrawal of the case from one single-judge bench and its assignment to some other bench by the chief justice of the high court.
The masjid committee’s plea said the case involved a significant issue concerning the Gyanvapi Mosque dispute and the interpretation of the Places of Worship (Special Provisions) Act, of 1991. “The matters had been heard extensively and judgment was reserved. Clarificatory hearings were also conducted with the need for these hearings duly acknowledged by the Single Judge. However, the withdrawal of the cases from the Single Judge without providing a copy of the complaint has fueled reasonable apprehension of bias in the minds of the petitioners while the impugned orders also depart from judicial discipline”, said the plea.
The plea said, “Though no discernible reason is provided by the Hon'ble Chief Justice (of the high court) as to why the said complaint could not be supplied to the petitioner, the passing reference made that the parties were open to inspect the records of the case contradicted the rules of the Hon'ble High Court, which do not permit inspection of records on the matters dealt with on the administrative side. It is stressed that the petitioners merely sought transparency in the interest of justice by requesting a copy of the complaint or details about its author to meet/address their concerns”.
On October 30, the Allahabad High Court adjourned the hearing till November 8 on the committee’s petition. On November 2, a Varanasi court granted the Archaeological Survey of India extension till November 17 after the ASI said it had “completed” the survey of the Gyanvapi mosque complex but needed more time to draft the report.
